This Atakapa Ishakkoy Living Dictionary is an electronic version of the Atakapa Ishākkoy Dictionary (2nd edition) by linguistic anthropologist David Kaufman, published by Exploration Press 2022 and created in close collaboration with Ishāk community members. Kaufman's dictionary was based on materials collected by Albert S. Gatschet and John R. Swanton in the early 20th century.

The linguistic data was imported to this online platform in 2024-2025 by David Kaufman in collaboration with researchers Anna Luisa Daigneault and Diego Córdova Nieto at Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages. Interns Devika Menon, Alex Mussomeli and Andrew Fowler provided assistance with digital data entry.

About the Ishāk

The (Atakapa) Ishāk are a North American Indigenous group, many of whom still inhabit their traditional homeland along the Gulf of Mexico in what is now southwestern Louisiana and eastern Texas. They have been in this region since before the European invasions of the sixteenth century. Ishāk history is closely intertwined with the history of the Lower Mississippi Valley (LMV) and the history of Creole Louisiana. Zydeco is said to have developed out of traditional Ishāk musical tradition (Singleton 1996). The Ishāk language, also called Ishākkoy or Yukhíti Koy, described in this book, is a now dormant isolate language with no surviving linguistic relatives. 

Modern Ishāk prefer to call themselves Atakapa Ishāk or simply Ishāk, meaning “person” or “people.” Ishāk also call themselves Yukhíti, a general term for “Indian” or Native person. The name Atakapa is an exonym bestowed upon them by Western Muskogean language speakers meaning ‘maneater,’ due to the supposed Ishakkoyan custom of ritual cannibalism, evidence of which is lacking and may actually refer to “the specter of enslavement by the Ishāk that other Indigenous Nations of the Gulf South feared” (Darensbourg and Price 2021, 14). Such labels as “cannibal” were sometimes also applied as a way of othering different groups of people, and the label was similarly applied to Karankawas and Tonkawas by other groups (Kimball 2022, 281). 

The Ishakkoyans were divided into four or five main bands. Those speaking Hiyékiti (Eastern Atakapa) were on Vermilion Bayou and the Mermentau River, while those speaking Yukhíti and Orkokisak (Akokisa) were on the Calcasieu, Sabine, Neches, and Trinity Rivers (1932:2). Swanton estimated a population of between 1000-3500 ca. 1805 (Swanton 1946, 94). The Ishāk may have been in place along the Gulf coast for a very long time, perhaps millennia (Kaufman 2019, 36). 


_______________
AUTHOR'S NOTE
A work like this is not the work of just one person. I want to express my deepest gratitude to the Ishāk consultants Kishyuc (Louison Huntington), Tottoksh (Delilah [Delia] Moss), Teet Verdine, and Armojean Reon for sharing their language with the early linguists Albert Gatschet and John Swanton. I also want to thank Hugh Singleton, who laid the foundation of Ishākkoy language revitalization in the 1990s. I would also like to thank the Ishāk community members and my friends Chief Edward Chretien, Jeffery Darensbourg, Tanner Menard, Russell Reed, and Çaca Yvaire for their support of this project and without whose help and contributions this dictionary could not have been done. I owe a debt of gratitute to my linguist colleague and friend Geoffrey Kimball; without his data analysis of Gatschet’s original handwritten notes this second edition could not have been possible. I also offer my sincere gratitude to my friend and colleague Justin Southworth for his insight and support in the preparation of this dictionary. I also want to thank my friend and colleague Stephen Compton, head of Exploration Press, for his editing expertise, cover design, and support in getting this book published. 

-Dave Kaufman (2022)

Acknowledgments (closing lines)

From the Acknowledgments by David Kaufman (2022); the earlier part of the Acknowledgments appears above in the Author's Note. The book's acknowledgments close with:

I also want to thank the many private donors who contributed to my online campaigns to help defer expenses in this book’s creation. Last, but not least, I’d like to thank the friendly staff of our local Peet’s Coffee for always making me feel welcome and providing frequent comic relief as I sat at one of their tables nursing an iced tea or coffee poring over language data.

Hiwéw! Wi sho tol a!

A few words from the Ishāk Nation

By community member Tanner Menard, 2022

As a former councilperson of the Atakapa Ishāk Nation, a contributing member of the tribe, and as a writer, I would like to thank Dr. David Kaufman for his contribution to the restoration of Ishākkoy. I know that our elders, cousin and Alligator council member Dr. Darensbourg, the Honorable Chief Edward Chretien, and members of our tribal council also extend their deepest thanks to the author for using his own resources to create this amazing text. What is most significant about this work is that it simplifies and clarifies the dictionary. The first edition was a masterful contribution to our tribe’s language restoration process, and the second edition incorporates grammar decoded by linguist Geoffrey D. Kimball in his work Yukhíti Kóy: A Reference Grammar of the Atakapa Language. Dr. Kaufman’s gift to our tribe cannot be quantified. It is priceless, and, in my mind, serves as an offering between our ancestors.

Our language has been asleep for such a short time in comparison to the eon that it has existed. Walking through the swamps and prairies of our people, when I am quiet, I can hear the language in the voice of nature. In my own limited use of the language, I have seen that the animals still remember our language. Our ancestors still know when these words are uttered. In my foreword to the first edition, I mused on the possibility of Ishāk people utilizing this language again. I can say now with joy that the language no longer slumbers.

I am grateful to Dr. Kaufman for his tireless dedication in working with us. The first edition has been a catalyst for unifying Atakapa Ishāk people across Turtle Island. Currently our people are a mixed-race group with membership ranging from our traditional homelands all the way to the shores of the Pacific. Our Ishāk language, lost to the reality of colonialism, has worked its way back from the Earth into the minds and hearts of our friends and allies. If the first edition opened a door for us to greet one another in a kind way using the words that have always been spoken among us, the second edition will continue to unite those of us who are interested and help us grow the lexicon of Ishāk literature.

Dr. Kaufman has spent many hours not only assembling the text but organizing US to work through the language. This isn’t always an easy task. The language is complex, and we are modern people. Each of us who has made contributions to this text and to the development of the language have done so because we love our people and because we love the potential of the language to be heard again.

All language originates in the mental sound of the human being. It was a mental sound that created the desire for the language to be remembered, it was a mental sound that created the first impulse of the language to describe the beautiful lands of our ancestors. But it was an action and an impulse to make a mental sound audible that led to the first word uttered in Ishākkoy, and it will be the same for the final word spoken in Ishākkoy. For each person, of any race, who lets this sound become audible, I am humbled by you and grateful to you.

Dr. Kaufman asked me for a few words on the current state of the Ishāk. I defer to my colleague, Dr. Jeffery Darensbourg:

We are them because we are what’s left of them. Torn, forgetful, wandering, often ignorant of important parts of ourselves. We are what’s left of them. We are the Atakapa. We are the Ishak. We’ve stood in this grass, tattoos on our faces, clay on our skin, calumet strapped to our back, longbows on our shoulders, in this mud, this prairie, this bayou, in this canoe, this river cane, this oak tree, this salt marsh, this salt dome island, this field fertilized with bison guts, this pecan grove, this river whose mud carries the fossil scales of a million garfish. living with it, it within us, for millennia. We are these people looking back on us from palmetto huts, last interviews with full-bloods who could turn our tongue without a thought, the ones who gnawed on a friend’s arm joking with themselves about being called cannibals. Whatever they were, we are. They called themselves ‘Ishāk’ because their ancestors did, and so do we.

Chief Edward Chretien also extends his deepest thanks to Dr. David Kaufman and to Justin Southworth for their dedication to the Ishāk language: “As Principal Chief of the Atakapa Ishāk Nation of Southwest Louisiana and Southeast Texas, I would like to thank you for your hard work. What a blessing that you have given our people. To have our language restored, how amazing. I pray that you will always have great blessings headed your way. May the Creator continue to bless you in your life.”

To the Facebook group that has put so much effort into “doing something” with the language, it’s been a wild and beautiful ride. Russell Reed, Justin Southworth, David Kaufman, Jeffery Darensbourg, Yvaire Q. Çaca, we all have lives, we all love the language, we do what we can with all of our heart.

By Tribal Councilmember Jeffery Darensbourg, 2022

In 2020, I was involved in several online language meetups involving Ishākkoy, which were hosted by linguists David Kaufman and Justin Southworth. These were quite useful to those of us who attended, especially with regards to learning to pronounce the language.

As part of one of these sessions in October 2020, I gave a talk titled, “Some Notes on Ishākkoy Ethnic and Food Terms.” I had recently read an article in Indian Country Today, “Indigenous Languages and Race: Tribes Rethink Dated Terms,” which discusses movements to update the ethnic vocabulary in Indigenous languages, particularly with regard to African Americans. As most Atakapa Ishāk people are of both Indigenous and African ancestry, this was of interest.

In Ishākkoy, two terms are available for people of African descent. One is kush mēl, meaning literally ‘all black.’ The other is hishtóhsh, meaning a person of mixed ethnic heritage, which I reckon would include Louisiana Creoles, who have mixed Indigenous, European, and African heritage. When asked by a cousin to translate Black Lives Matter into Ishākkoy, I chose the phrase Kush Mēl Pistaks Ush, which translates literally as ‘Life All Black Genuine/Big.’ It was difficult to capture the English “matters” in Ishākkoy, but the multivalent ush was as close as I could get after much deliberation.

There are some issues with color terms involved in ethnic designations in Indigenous languages, as these are terms borrowed from European conceptions of ethnicity, as the article mentioned above explains. While this is an issue with kush mēl, the problem brought up in our meeting was not with this term but with another term that builds on it, one containing an offensive reference. That term is kush mēl tikáw, meaning ‘like a Black person.’ It was the Ishākkoy word for a monkey.

Fortunately, we had a special guest in attendance that night, Donna Pierite, a member of the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana. Donna has been involved for many years in language revitalization efforts for the Tunica language. Donna listened to this discussion carefully and fortunately she knows some other regional languages, including Choctaw. The Choctaw term for a monkey, hatak shaui, means ‘raccoon man.’ Donna suggested that we might consider going in that direction. It’s inoffensive and also preserves some of the structure of the Ishākkoy term, making “monkey” a comparison to something else. We discussed it in the group and decided to change the Ishākkoy word for monkey to wulkishāk tikáw, meaning ‘like a raccoon man.’

It was empowering to change a word. The act indicates that our language is alive, not a museum piece. It is an act of hope to do this, and I hope that making our language inoffensive will someday benefit future speakers. We were also honored to receive help in the process from such a noted worker in language revitalization as Donna.

From the introduction by David Kaufman (2022)

The sections below are from the introduction of the Atakapa Ishākkoy Dictionary (2nd edition), numbered as in the printed book. Section 1.0 "About the Ishāk" is already in the text above.

Notes to section 1.0 (About the Ishāk, above)

¹ Due to the exonymic and colonialist nature of the term “Atakapa,” in this book I use Ishakkoyan to denote the language family rather than the traditional term “Atakapan.”

² The etymology of the term Orkokisak is Ishakkoyan, reconstructed as “persimmon-gathering people” (Kimball 2022, 281). Swanton changed the name to Akokisa (Gatschet and Swanton 1932, 1), which I will no longer use.

1.1 Archaeology and culture

Ishāk were primarily hunter-gatherers and fishermen who hunted white-tailed deer and bison (see, for example, Darensbourg 2021). They alternated between living in coastal regions and inland areas according to season. They traded dried and smoked fish as well as shark teeth with other groups (Swanton 1946; Kaufman 2019, 36). Ishāk, along with Chitimachas and Caddoans, lived near the Avery Island salt dome (now famous for producing McIlhenny Tabasco Sauce) and likely mined and traded salt (Kaufman 2019, 36, 161). They practiced farming on a small scale but were not known to be intensive agriculturalists like other LMV groups. Ishāk built funerary mounds but are not known to have built the massive monumental earthworks and broad communal spaces (plazas) characteristic of other groups in the LMV and Southeast, especially during the Mississippian (Plaquemine) Culture era (ca. 1000-1700 CE). There is the possibility that Ishāk, along with some other groups, determined to mostly not be included in Mississippian Culture with its socially ranked societies and hierarchical systems of governance largely sustained by intensive maize agriculture.

Ishāk form part of what archaeologists call the Mossy Grove Tradition of southeastern Texas and southwestern Louisiana, roughly extending from the Sabine River in the east to the Colorado River in the west (Ricklis 2004, 191; Kaufman 2019, 35). Goose Creek Plain pottery shows up in the region at least 2000 years ago. Ceramic sherds, both plain and decorated, with bone temper and sandy paste have been found along the Trinity River; radiocarbon dates range from ca. 860-1400 CE. Arrow points have been found made of wood and gray chert (Perttula and Nelson 2013, 17-21). While the ethnic affiliation of these artifacts remains unknown, they have been found in an area long populated by Ishāk.

2.0 Sources and prior work on Ishākkoy

The main source used in the creation of this Second Edition revised dictionary is the original handwritten fieldnotes as taken down by Gatschet in the nineteenth century and analyzed by my linguist colleague, Geoffrey Kimball, in his book, Yukhíti kóy: a reference grammar of the Atakapa language (2022). To a much lesser degree, this dictionary reflects the GS A dictionary of the Atakapa language accompanied by text material, published as Bulletin 108 by the Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology (1932). The 1932 dictionary had gathered materials from several sources, including two small pamphlets by J. Dyer of 1916 and 1917 (see GS 1932, 1) and a prior work published by Swanton as Bulletin 68 in 1919 titled, A comparison of Atakapa, Chitimacha, and Tunica. Swanton also published a paper in the International Journal of American Linguistics (IJAL), Volume 5 in 1929 that was a preliminary grammatical sketch of the language.

What we currently know of Hiyékiti was gathered in a list of 287 words by Martin Duralde in 1802 at Attackapas Post (modern Franklin, Louisiana). Yukhíti, the largest vocabulary of any Ishakkoyan language, was collected by Albert Gatschet in 1885 in Lake Charles. Gatschet’s primary Ishāk language consultants were Kishyuc (Louison Huntington) and Tottoksh (Delilah [Delia] Moss). John Swanton, in 1907-08, collected more vocabulary from Teet Verdine, Armojean Reon, and Tottoksh.

Unfortunately, following convention at the time and as was done with other dictionaries like that for Biloxi and Ofo (Gatschet and Swanton, 1912), in his dictionary Swanton placed much of the vocabulary under his idea of “root” forms that, in many cases, distort the actual forms of words. (For example, he lists mak as the word for ‘fall’ when the full form is actually makáw). Such “words” appearing in such a subjective “root” form make proper use of the 1932 dictionary both by learners and scholars difficult, at best. (See Haas [1969] for her similar conclusion on using the 1912 Biloxi-Ofo dictionary, which prompted my revision of that as well.)

Hubert (Hugh) Singleton (1926-2009; see photo, Fig. 3) was a chief of the Ishāk nation. He researched Ishāk history and published a book titled, The Indians who gave us zydeco (1996) and produced an Ishākkoy list of phrases based on GS.

My own work on Ishākkoy began with research for my doctoral dissertation, published in 2014. I published an article titled, Another Look at Atakapa (2014) through KU Scholarworks that highlighted some of my early research and preliminary analysis of the language. A revised version of my dissertation, catering to a broader, less technical audience, was published as a book, Clues to lower Mississippi Valley histories: language, archaeology, ethnography (2019), published by the University of Nebraska Press.

3.0 About Ishākkoy

Ishākkoy is now extinct, or what we in language revitalization work prefer to call dormant, since it can be revived and is, in fact, in the process of revitalization. The last recognized native speaker of the language died in the 1930s. Ishākkoy is part of a broader language family called Ishakkoyan (formerly Atakapan), possibly including Adai, Bidai, Han, and Opelousa. Ishakkoyan contains three primary languages (from east to west): Hiyékiti, Yukhíti, and Orkokisak. Hiyékiti was formerly called Eastern Atakapa and Yukhíti Western Atakapa.

The first known vocabulary taken down of an Ishakkoyan language was by the French sea captain John Bérenger in the eighteenth century while venturing through Galveston Bay near modern Houston. Kimball incorporated Béranger’s short vocabulary of Orkokisak, a people who lived on Galveston Bay, into his grammar. Swanton believed that the Han, first noted by Cabeza de Vaca as living at the eastern end of Galveston Island in 1528, were probably Ishakkoyan (the term Han possibly being from the Ishākkoy word aņ ‘house’) (Swanton 1940, 136).

Ishākkoy, like many other North American Indigenous languages, is structurally agglutinative and moderately polysynthetic. This means that many grammatical elements are affixed, or attached, to a head word, usually a verb. Thus, an entire sentence in English may be conveyed by a single word in Ishākkoy. For example, nhúo ‘I see you,’ contains n-, the second-person singular object prefix (you), hu the verb ‘see,’ and -o the first-person singular subject suffix pronoun (I), thus three words in English form a single word in Ishākkoy. In extreme cases a single Ishākkoy word can become quite long as it encapsulates an entire English sentence, such as shakináwshkohháhulat ‘they didn’t want to let them in’ and nshokyáhkohshhásh ‘you don’t want to eat.’

The usual sentence structure is subject-object-verb (SOV), that is, the verb is normally phrase-final, although the data show many exceptions to this, with sentences often appearing in subject-verb-object (SVO) order (whether this was an accepted Ishākkoy variant word order or arose through contact with Indo-European [French, Spanish, and/or English] influence is unknown at this point). Ishākkoy makes no clear distinction between stems that we call in English nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. (Adjectives are actually stative verbs in Ishākkoy.) Grammatical categories are generally defined by their morphosyntactic form, but, unlike in English and other Indo-European (e.g., French and Spanish) languages, stems often move fluidly between syntactic categories. For example, the Ishākkoy stem koy can be translated by the verbs ‘speak’ and ‘talk’ as well as by the nouns ‘speech,’ ‘throat,’ ‘tongue,’ and ‘language.’ Other lexical elements in Ishākkoy include adverbs, pronouns, and postpositions (rather than prepositions).

Both verbs and nouns can be marked for plural, although plural marking on nouns is not obligatory. Some verbs and nouns have special plural forms, and these are marked in an entry where appropriate (see section 7.1.1).

3.1 Language contact

Ishākkoy shares certain grammatical elements with nearby Tonkawa and Chitimacha (see Kimball [2022] for further discussion). There are word borrowings between Ishākkoy, Caddoan, Chitimacha, Koasati, and possibly Biloxi (such borrowings are noted in entries where appropriate).

In Kaufman (2014, 2019) I analyzed Ishākkoy as a part of the LMV language area, or sprachbund, which also includes Biloxi and Ofo (Siouan), Choctaw and Chickasaw (Muskogean), and the other isolates Chitimacha, Natchez, and Tunica, as well as the pidgin Mobilian Trade Language (MTL, or Mobilian Jargon). Many Ishãk likely spoke MTL as a second language for trade, and there is the Ishākkoy greeting salá or sla likely borrowed from MTL ishla (Swadesh 1934; Kaufman 2017).

The LMV sprachbund may have arisen during the religious and sociopolitical movement that archaeologists call Mississippian Culture (ca. 1000-1700 CE). Ishakkoyans were marginally involved in the Mississippian Culture phenomenon largely located to the north and east. In Kaufman (2014; 2019) I also overlap Ishākkoy with what I have termed the Rio Grande Valley (RGV) sprachbund.⁴

There is evidence that Ishāk used a form of sign language, which may be the same as, or at least related to, the well-known Plains Sign Language (PSL) to the north. PSL may have originated in the Rio Grande Valley region or even farther south in Mexico (Kaufman 2014; 2019; Fox Tree 2009).

3.2 Unique features

Among the more unique features of Ishākkoy are: (1) a suppletive (separate) set of negative verbs in contrast to positive forms: the negative forms of ke ‘have,’ koh ‘want,’ and uhc ‘be able to’ are hahsh ‘not have,’ oņsh ‘not want,’ and awsh ‘be unable to’; (2) spatial language that correlates future with “back/behind” and past with “in front/before” (the past is visible and known and is thus in front⁵ while the future is unknown and unseeable, therefore behind) so that íti itiyílsh (literally, in.front month) is ‘last month’ while hal itiyílsh (literally, back/behind month) is ‘next month’; (3) a set of suppletive (separate) plural positional stance verbs (as in other LMV sprachbund languages) (see section 7.2.3); and (4) nouns that are considered animate for items considered culturally salient and important versus those that are not (see section 7.1.2).

4.0 Atakapa Ishākkoy alphabet and orthography

4.1 Alphabet

The alphabet used in this dictionary consists of the following 24 letters occurring in the following order: ā, a, c, ē, e, h, hl, ī, i, k, l, m, n, ņ, ō, o, p, s, sh, t, tl, u, w, and y. Ishākkoy contains no letters b, d, g, j, q, r, v, x, or z. There are no nasal vowels, but all vowels except u have both long and short versions, the long versions marked with a macron (¯) above them. The symbol ’ is used before the syllabic n (’n) in the middle or end of words to indicate its syllabic pronunciation as slightly longer and distinct from a standard n, though it is not marked word-initially nor is it considered a separate letter.

4.2 Orthography-spelling

The headword for each entry in this dictionary has been retranscribed largely using modern Americanist symbols. Most entries also contain a page number reference to the original GS (1932) dictionary. The transcriptions were revised according to my understanding of Ishākkoy phonetics and phonology with further adjustment from Kimball’s Yukhíti kóy grammar (2022).

4.3 Comparison of linguistic and practical orthographies

Older orthographies	Orthography used in this dictionary
a, ă, ĭ	ā, a
c	sh
ts	c
e	ē, e
g, gg, k	k
h	h
i	ī, i
l	l
ł	hl, tl
m	m
n	n, ’n
n, ñ	ņ
o	ō, o
p	p
s	s
t	t
tl, ł	tl
u	u
w	w
y	y

The approximate pronunciation of the letters of the alphabet is as follows:

Letter	Approximate pronunciation
a	as a in English father, as unstressed a (schwa), as in English above or even as i in pit.
aw	as ow in English crowd.
ay	as i in English tide.
c	as ts in English bats.
e	e as in English bet; sometimes not clearly pronounced in unstressed position.
ew	a combination of English ay-oo pronounced as a single sound.
ey	as ei in English eight.
h	as in English.
hl	No exact English equivalent but a lateral fricative made by placing your tongue in position for l but then blowing out, as in Choctaw lh or Welsh ll.
i	as ee in English beet; sometimes not clearly pronounced in unstressed position.
iw	like ew in English few.
k	as in English.
l	as in English.
m	as in English.
n	as in English.
ņ	as English ng in sing.
o	as oa in English boat; sometimes when unstressed becomes schwa as in a above.
oy	like oy in English boy.
p	as in English.
s	as in English.
sh	as sh in English shoe.
t	as in English.
tl	similar to hl above but with a slight t sound before it. No exact English equivalent but a lateral fricative as in Nahuatl tl.
u	as oo in English boot.
uy	like ooey in English phooey.
w	as in English, but in word-final position often reduced to a labial or bilabial fricative similar to f or v.
y	as y in English yet except in diphthongs (ay, ey, oy, uy).

5.0 Ishākkoy pronunciation

Swanton states, “[t]he phonetic system employed [in the dictionary] is far from perfect, and of course it can never become perfect” (1932, 5). This is as true of this revised dictionary as it was then. Since we have no recordings of native speakers, we can now never know exactly how Ishākkoy was pronounced or how it sounded. All we have currently is the written data of the nineteenth and early twentieth century linguists who worked on the language.

Unfortunately, the Americanist transcription practices of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and their method of dictionary presentation are largely confusing, even to scholars acquainted with such conventions. It is largely for this reason that the present revised dictionary has been done.

Some general comments on pronunciation are as follows: the letter c is pronounced ts as in cats. The letters t and h followed by l form related but separate sounds and letters tl and hl, the first only word- or syllable-initial (tla ‘mosquito’) and the second in other positions (tehlk ‘flower’). The f or v sound was heard in rare cases as an allophone (alternate pronunciation) of p or w in word- and syllable-final position (e.g., ap, af ‘here’ and wewéw, wewéf ‘barking’). The letters s and h together form the sound sh (as in English) and are considered a separate letter; sh normally becomes s after n. In addition to n and ņ there is a syllabic n (with a slightly longer and more exaggerated pronunciation than standard n) that forms its own separate syllable; the suffix -’n also marks the subordinate mode in contrast to the suffix -n that marks the conjunction ‘and’ separating items in a list. Unstressed short vowels can weaken (phonetic weakening) to schwa. Word-final w often seems to have been reduced to a labial or bilabial fricative (like blowing through slightly open lips) and was often written in the GS dictionary as f or v. Kimball (2022) determined from Gatschet’s fieldnotes what Swanton (1932, 5) had already suspected, that x was, in fact, a mere allophone (alternate sound) of h, especially before other consonants and in word-final position (thus x has been replaced with h). Some words beginning with vowels have often been noted with aspiration (breathiness) before the initial vowel. As in some other LMV languages, for some reason this initial aspiration, or h sound, can come and go. I have noted this as a feature of the LMV sprachbund (Kaufman, 2019). Since this feature also occurs in the Mobilian Trade Language (MTL; Mobilian Jargon), of which some Ishāk may have been speakers, it is possible that this feature may be due to MTL influence. Many vowel-initial words are thus included under both the letter h and under the respective vowel when both forms have been noted in the data. There are three forms of n, though the syllabic variant often written ’n is not considered a separate letter. The sound and letter tl is largely limited to word- and syllable-initial position and may represent the lateral fricative ɬ found in Muskogean and other Southeastern languages. On occasion, sometimes due to affixation and compounding, the same consonant may occur doubled. Such doubled consonants may make the only distinction between two different words, such as koli ‘branch, twig’ and kolli ‘bell(s).’ Doubled consonants should be pronounced twice as long as single consonants (as in Italian).

(Sections 6.0 to 9.0 of the introduction, on stress, pitch, vowel length and grammar, are on this dictionary's Grammar page.)

10.0 About this revised dictionary

This dictionary serves to partially give back to the Ishāk what was originally theirs. It has been prepared to serve as a valuable reference tool for Ishāk wanting to reclaim their heritage language, as well as to serve as a reference source for linguists or anyone else interested in learning about this fascinating language. It is hoped that this will be the first step in a successful language revitalization program that will have Ishāk once again speaking their ancestral language on a daily basis. (In fact, this process of relearning their ancestral language has already begun among some tribal members.)

The first edition of this revised dictionary was published in 2019, based primarily on the original GS dictionary with the goal of making that original dictionary more user-friendly and accessible. However, I did not have access to the original Gatschet handwritten fieldnotes at the time I published the first edition. Shortly after its publication, it came to my attention that my linguist colleague Geoffrey Kimball, who also focuses heavily on Southeastern Indigenous languages, had gained access to Gatschet’s original nineteenth century handwritten notes at the Smithsonian Institution archives. Some elements of these notes were left out of the GS dictionary, and these notes, taken in consultation with actual native speakers of Ishākkoy, offered more in-depth understanding of the language as it was spoken at the time. Kimball was in the process of developing his reference grammar from these original materials, and we began corresponding on the data and had meetings with Ishāk nation members who were already in the process of relearning their ancestral tongue. (There is a private Facebook group dedicated to learning and teaching the language with active correspondence between tribal members and linguists.)

This dictionary contains much of the same data that the original 1932 GS dictionary does, but it has been significantly updated and adjusted with current information based on Kimball’s analysis of the language data as it occurs in his grammar from Gatschet’s fieldnotes. This dictionary is analytic in nature, geared toward providing more insight on word formation for learning and revitalization purposes.

11.0 Using this Dictionary

11.1 Entries in the Atakapa Ishākkoy Dictionary

The dictionary is divided into two primary sections: the first part is the Atakapa Ishākkoy-English Dictionary, and the second is the English-Atakapa Ishākkoy Index. As its name suggests, the Index is not a complete dictionary in itself, but is intended only as a quick reference to finding an Ishākkoy word that can then be looked up in the Ishākkoy-English Dictionary for further information.

Here is a typical entry from the Atakapa Ishākkoy Dictionary:

yanyán ENTRY WORD (bold)

vt. To fear sby., be afraid of sby. (PART OF SPEECH (verb) + TYPE OF VERB [transitive] + DEFINITION)

(EXAMPLES OF USE IN PHRASES)

■ Wi hiyanyán. I am afraid of sby. (GS. 29). (PAGE NUMBER IN GS ENTRY)

■ Hiyanyanháh. I am not afraid of sby. (GS. 29).

■ Ishāk hiyanyánsho tiwē tísho. I was afraid of him but went with him (GS. 29).

■ Wish wi itēt hiyanyánháhshat. I was not afraid of my father (GS. 29).

var. yanyáns. (SEE VARIANT FORM)

➲ hatshoshólsh, hatyanyáns. (SEE RELATED ENTRIES)

In this dictionary, entries for each letter begin with affixes (marked with a dash). Entries with long vowels (ā, ē, ī, ō) are placed before those beginning with short vowels. The letter ņ follows n, sh comes after s, and tl follows t. Entry words occurring in italics are neologisms (new words) created and used with consent of Ishāk tribal members.

Each boldfaced entry is followed by one or more definitions, verb (transitive verb [vt.], intransitive verb [vi.], or stative verb [vs.]) first, noun (n.) second, and so on. Boldfaced numbers, as in the example above, occur only when more than one definition is indicated; otherwise no numbers are used. Note that although the word class adjective does not technically exist in Ishākkoy, the term is used (abbreviated ‘adj.’) in this dictionary for the convenience of English speakers. Some entries are cross-referenced with the symbol ➲ indicating a related entry with the same or similar meaning. Where possible, cognate forms from other languages, particularly those in close geographical proximity (e.g., Caddoan, Chitimacha), are given. The symbol ■ indicates an example sentence with a page reference to the GS. and/or K. original. The symbol ◆ indicates an editorial note or comment. The abbreviation Hi. indicates that a particular word is Hiyékiti while Or. indicates Orkokisak. Yukhíti words (the majority) are unmarked.

Certain entries comprised of multiple words or morphemes are broken down into their component parts for easier identification (and to provide potential guidance in the creation of new vocabulary for language revitalization). These entries are placed in brackets:

[cóhoc yah + -ne] (corn eat + -er = corn weevil)

The literal (lit.) translation of certain words is provided:

lit. flapping ear (mouse)

Certain entries are compared to words in other languages (e.g., Chitimacha), suggesting possible copying or borrowing:

cf., Chit. kica (kish ‘woman’)

Examples of word usage are often provided, with the page number of the original example in the GS dictionary and/or from Kimball’s grammar provided:

Cit láwkit. The tobacco burns (GS. 121).

Kish yíl’n yukhíti koyntō. The woman will be speaking Ishākkoy tomorrow (GS. 68; K. 49).

Variants of words, which may be due to dialectal differences, are given separate entries:

alsh, var. of als, ice.

yanyáns, var. of yanyán, be afraid of sby.

11.2 Entries in the English-Ishākkoy Index

The English-Ishākkoy Index in this revised dictionary is intended to show a language learner or researcher exactly how a word appears in the Ishākkoy-English portion of the dictionary. This was an element of the original GS dictionary that fell frustratingly short, since only Swanton’s subjective “roots” of words were presented in the index (as in the dictionary itself) rather than whole words, leaving the user to thumb through sometimes pages of data to find the correct form.

Here is an example from the English-Ishākkoy index in this revised dictionary:

jump, to, vi. puh.

The English form is given in boldface first, followed by part of speech (e.g., vi. for intransitive verb) and the Ishākkoy translation(s). Verbs are given in their English infinitival form with to. All known Ishākkoy translations of an English word are provided, but the dictionary user should consult the main Ishākkoy-English part of the dictionary for more information on a particular Ishākkoy word and for any examples of usage or other notes that may be provided in the entry. For words that indicate a general term for types of flora and fauna, an alphabetical list of species names is given in English for anyone wanting to look up a specific species that is listed in this dictionary.

11.3 Appendices

At the end of the Dictionary are five appendices labeled A through E. The appendices primarily give easy-to-read listings or summaries of common items listed in the Dictionary for easier reference (and which can be easily copied and used for classroom or learning purposes). Appendix A is a summary of Ishākkoy affixes (prefixes and suffixes), affixes that do not normally form words themselves but must be used in conjunction with a verb or noun root. Examples are provided for the usage of each affix. Appendix B gives numbers, Appendix C is a summary of terms for fauna, and Appendix D gives a summary of terms for flora.⁶ Appendix E shows two modern short stories by Ishāk community member Russell Reed and a modern poem and zydeco lyrics by Councilmember Jeffery Darensbourg. As for texts (originally published in the GS dictionary), I refer readers to Kimball (2022). Since Kimball has reanalyzed, retranslated, and reprinted all of the extant Ishāk texts in his grammar, no texts are included in this dictionary.

Notes to sections 3.1, 3.2 and 11.3

⁴ The RGV sprachbund includes Tonkawa, Karankawa, Cotoname, and Coahuiltec, among others.

⁵ This trait is shared with Quechua, Aymara, and some Amazonian languages of South America though not to my knowledge with other North American languages.

⁶ Definitions for flora were given by Jeffery Darensbourg in consultation with Blaise Pezold, Coastal and Environmental Program Manager at The Meraux Foundation.

12.0 References

• Darensbourg, Jeffery. 2021. “Hunting Memories of the Grass Things: An Indigenous Reflection on Bison in Louisiana.” In Southern Cultures 27, 1, 14–24.
• Darensbourg, Jeffery. 2021. “A Studio in the Woods.” Yellow Medicine Review: A Journal of Indigenous Literature, Art, and Thought. Spring. 135–36.
• Dorsey, James and John Swanton. 1912. A Dictionary of the Biloxi and Ofo Languages. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 47. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
• Fox Tree, Erich. 2009. “Meemul Tziij: An Indigenous Sign Language Complex of Mesoamerica.” Sign Language Studies 9, 3, 324–66.
• Gatschet, Albert & John Swanton. 1932. A Dictionary of the Atakapa Language: Accompanied by Text Material. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
• Haas, Mary. 1969. “Swanton and the Biloxi and Ofo Dictionaries.” In Journal of American Linguistics, 35, 4, 286–90.
• Kaufman, David. 2014a. The Lower Mississippi Valley as a Language Area. PhD dissertation. University of Kansas, Department of Anthropology.
• Kaufman, David. 2014b. “Another Look at Atakapa.” In Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 35, 72–78.
• Kaufman, David. 2019. Clues to Lower Mississippi Valley Histories: Language, Archaeology, Ethnography. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
• Kimball, Geoffrey. 2022. Yukhíti Kóy: A Reference Grammar of the Atakapa Language. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
• Perttula, Timothy and Bo Nelson. 2013. “The Larrison Creek North (41MA36) Site in the Post Oak Savanna of East Central Texas.” In Archaeological Journal of the Texas Prairie-Savannah, 3, 1, 17–21.
• Ricklis, Robert A. 2004. “The Archaeology of the Native American Occupation of Southeast Texas.” In The Prehistory of Texas, edited by T. Perttula. College Station: Texas A&M University Press. 181–202.
• Singleton, Herbert. 1998 [2005]. The Indians Who Gave Us Zydeco: The Atakapas-Ishaks of Southwest Louisiana and Southeast Texas. Privately published.
• Swadesh, Morris. 1934. “Atakapa fragments recorded from descendants of speakers.” Unpublished notes, ACLS Collection, American Council of Learned Societies Committee on Native American Languages Collection, American Philosophical Society, Mss.497.3.B63c.
• Swanton, John R. 1929. “A Sketch of the Atakapa Language.” In International Journal of American Linguistics, 5, 2/4, 121–49.
• Swanton, John R., 1940. “Linguistic Material from the Tribes of Southern Texas and Northeastern Mexico.” Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 127. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
• Swanton, John R. 1976 [1946]. “The Indians of the Southeastern United States.” Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 137. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
• Tomkins, William. 1969 [1926]. Indian Sign Language 92. Courier Corporation. 22.

13.0 Abbreviations used in this dictionary

Abbreviation	Meaning
<	from (term borrowed from another language).
➲	see variant or related word.
■	example phrase/sentence.
◆	editorial comment or note, from original compilers or current editor.
adj.	adjective or word acting as an adjective or descriptor.
adv.	adverb.
Alg.	Algonquian (peoples and languages of northern and eastern North America, including Blackfoot, Ojibwe, Cree, Lenape [Delaware]).
ANAT.	anatomical, pertaining to human body parts.
anim.	animate.
Arch.	archaic or outmoded form.
Arik.	Arikara, a Caddoan language spoken in the northern Plains.
ASTR.	astronomical, pertaining to astronomical bodies (stars, planets).
ATTR.	attributive, having a descriptive meaning.
AUG.	augmentative.
Bi.	Biloxi, a Siouan language once spoken in Mississippi (Biloxis are now members of the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana).
BOT.	botanical, pertaining to plants or trees.
Cad.	Caddoan, a language family of the southern Plains (including Arikara, Pawnee, Wichita).
CAUS.	causative.
cf.	compare (with term in another language).
Choc.	Choctaw, a Western Muskogean language.
Chit.	Chitimacha, an isolate language of modern Louisiana.
conj.	conjunction.
DAT.	dative.
DEM.	demonstrative.
DIM.	diminutive.
DIR.	directional.
ed.	editor (myself).
Eng.	English.
EVID.	evidential.
exclam.	exclamation.
Fr.	French.
G.	Gatschet, Albert S. (linguist) pertaining to his fieldnotes from 1885.
GS.	Gatschet-Swanton, pertaining to forms in the original Atakapa Ishāk dictionary published in 1932.
H.	Haas, Mary (linguist).
Hi.	Hiyékiti (Eastern Atakapa Ishāk, Sunrise People).
inan.	inanimate.
ind.	independent.
IMPER.	imperative (command).
INST.	instrumental.
intens.	intensifier.
inter.	interrogative.
irr.	irrealis.
irreg.	irregular.
Koa.	Koasati (Coushatta), an Eastern Muskogean language.
lit.	literally.
LOC.	locative (in or at).
LMV	Lower Mississippi Valley.
MEAS.	measure, pertaining to measurement.
MED.	medicinal, relating to herbs or materials used for medicinal and curative purposes.
MTL.	Mobilian Trade Language, aka Mobilian Jargon, Mobilian Pidgin.
MYTH.	mythological, pertaining to a mythological character or mythology and narrative in general.
n.	noun.
Nat.	Natchez, an isolate language of modern Oklahoma and South Carolina.
np.	proper noun, name.
NUM.	numerical, number.
obj.	object.
Ofo	a Siouan language (aka Mosopelea) once spoken in the Ohio Valley and along the Yazoo River.
OP	object prefixed pronoun.
Or.	Orkokisak (Akokisa).
PART.	particle.
pers.	person.
pl.	plural.
pos. cl.	positional (verb) classifier.
poss.	possessive.
PREF.	prefix.
pron.	pronominal, pronoun.
Pwn.	Pawnee, a Caddoan language of the southern Plains.
QUANT.	quantifier, quantity.
sby.	somebody.
sg.	singular.
Sp.	Spanish.
SS	subject suffixed pronoun.
stg.	something.
subj.	subject.
SUF.	suffix.
Sw.	Swadesh, Morris (linguist).
Tnk.	Tonkawa, an isolate language once spoken in northeastern Texas (Tonkawas are now in Oklahoma).
trans. bor.	translation borrowing (calque), a literal translation into Atakapa Ishāk from another language, usually from English.
Tun.	Tunica, an isolate language of modern Louisiana (Tunicas are now part of the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana).
vi.	intransitive verb (no object).
vs.	stative verb.
vt.	transitive verb (with object).
VAR.	variant, (dialectal) variation.
ZOOL.	zoological, pertaining to (non-human) animals, fish, insects, or other beings.

Figures in the printed edition

Figure 1. Statue of Ishāk warrior in St. Martinville, Louisiana. (Wikimedia Commons.)

Figure 2. Atakapa Trace Junction sign located in Junction, Louisiana at intersection of LA 111 and US Route 190. (Wikimedia Commons.) Exact translation of wáņne tol hokinúl is ‘end of roads join together.’

Figure 3. Drawing of Ishāk by Alexandre deBatz, 1735. (Wikimedia Commons.)

Figure 4. Ishāk Chief Edward Chretien (left) with my linguist colleague Justin Southworth (right). Photo by Brigitte Southworth (used with permission).

Figure 5. Herbert (Hugh) Singleton (1926-2009), Ishāk author and language teacher (used with permission from the Atakapa Ishāk council).

Figure 6. Community and Councilmember Jeffery Darensbourg (used with permission). (See Appendix E for his poem and zydeco lyrics.)

Figure 7. Community member Russell Reed. Photo by Kay Rawls (used with permission). (See Appendix E for his short stories.)

Figure 8. Photo of community member Tanner Menard (used with permission).

Figure 9. Photo of community member Hyperion Çaca Yvaire (used with permission).

Figure 10. Collection of Ishāk twilled shohkóy ‘baskets’ made from red and yellow cane (from Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, Report of the US National Museum, p. 388, 1904, Plate 135. Catalog numbers 165735-165739; collected by Mrs. William Preston Johnston).3 (From Wikimedia.)

About the author

Copyright @ David V. Kaufman, 2022

David Kaufman holds advanced degrees in linguistics and anthropology. His primary focus is on Indigenous language revitalization and historical and comparative linguistics. He got interested in the Ishāk language while studying it, along with several other Indigenous languages, in the writing of his dissertation. He is an accomplished author and professional copyeditor for both fiction and nonfiction. He currently lives in California.